Italian Ceramics: Catalogue of the J. Paul Getty Museum Collection

The plate in Braunschweig, however, was identified

by Rackham as the work of the so-called Saint John

Painter, after a plate depicting the saint in the Victoria

and Albert Museum, London.^13 These two plates were

then grouped with a third, also attributed to the Saint

John Painter, depicting the Erythraean Sibyl and for­

merly in the Frassineto and Caruso collections.^14 Under

scrutiny, these three works do not appear to be painted

by the same individual.

Rackham identified the panel of Coriolanus as work

of the so-called Master C. I. after a plate in the State Her­

mitage Museum, Saint Petersburg, inscribed with those

initials (or possibly G. I.).^15 More recently, the Samson

plate in Kracow has been associated with the same

artist.^16 Rather than the roughly eighteen objects attrib­

uted to this artist, it seems more prudent to revise

the number to between five and seven. These fewer ob­

jects— displaying strong and idiosyncratic stylistic con­

nections—are a plate with a monk and naked boy in the

Musee de la Renaissance, Ecouen;^17 a plate with Perseus

and Andromeda and a plate of a bearded figure and Mer­

cury surrounded by a berettino rim in the Victoria and

Albert Museum, London;^18 a plate with Diana and Ac-

taeon in the Musee des Arts Decoratifs, Lyons,-^19 possi­

bly a plate after a drawing attributed to Jacopo Ripanda^20

or Jacopo da Bologna^21 in the British Museum, London,-^22

and a plate with Judith and Holofernes in the Musee de

la Renaissance, Ecouen.^23 Excluded from this group is

the Coriolanus panel and the Samson plate, now associ­

ated with the Amata and Turnus painter.

Rackham also identifies and attempts to group to­

gether the work of several other maiolica painters active

in Faenza just after the turn of the sixteenth century,

including the so-called Assumption Painter, Master

Gonela, the Lucretia Painter, and the Master of the Res­

urrection Panel.^24 All of the pieces attributed to these

artists are in need of reexamination and reevaluation.^25

What is certain are the stylistic similarities shared by

early istohato artists active in Faenza around 1520, in­

cluding those in the Casa Pirota workshop.^26 Indeed,

their style anticipates and may well have influenced that

of their compatriot and fellow maiolica artist Baldassare

Manara (active ca. 1526-47) (see no. 30).

Notes

1. According to Ballardini 1933, 1: 13-14; 2: io; Ballardini 1975 / 59~7i/
   92.


2. Robinson 1858, 1: 13-14.


3. See Malagola 1880, 140-41; Genolini 1881, 57.


4. Of the two known pieces with inscriptions indicating their manufacture
   in the Casa Pirota (located in the Museo Civico, Bologna, and in the
   Musee National de Ceramique, Sevres) neither bears the crossed-circle
   mark. Moreover, variants of the crossed circle appear on works from
   centers other than Faenza (such as Gubbio and Castel Durante) as
   simple decorative motifs or as spheres. When depicted in the hands of
   small boys, for example, it resembles apallone (pneumatic ball). Finally,
   if the Faentine examples were intended to represent spheres, there
   would be no reason to associate them with the Casa Pirota, since they
   would not also have been understood as wheels. For more information
   regarding the crossed-circle mark see Ballardini 1940, 66-72, pis. 14-17;
   Norman 1969, 447-48; Mallet 1974, 12-13, pis. XlVa-b.


5. See, for example, Ballardini 1929, pi. 17,- sale cat., Sotheby's, 1939, lot
   77; sale cat., Sotheby's, London, March 18, 1975, lot 36; sale cat.,
   Sotheby's, London, March n, 1980, lots 16-17.


6. I would like to thank Dr. William Wesley Trimpi, Professor of English,
   Emeritus, Stanford University, for his assistance in identifying the
   scene.


7. Brazouski 1991, 129-36.


8. Grimal 1963, 89-91; Phillips 1978, 70-73; Dixon 1988, esp. 62-63, 196,
   211, 216-17, 227-28 (as cited in Brazouski 1991, 129 and note 1).


9. Cartari [1647] 1963, 258.


10. Alciati 1621, no. in.


11. Lessmann 1979, 98, no. 17, pi. 18; Zboinska-Daszynska 1952, no. 12 ,
    pis. XIV, XLI (cited in Ravanelli Guidotti 1996, 33, 36 n. 9, fig. 4f-g);
    Rackham 1940, 1: 81-82, no. 259; 2: pi. 43.


12. A decorative rendering of the serratas anterior and rectus abdominus
    muscles.


13. Rackham 1940, 1: no. 266; 2: pi. 42.


14. Sale cat., Sotheby's, London, March 20, 1973, lot 27.


15. Darcel 1885, pi. XLIII.


16. Ravanelli Guidotti 1996, 36.


17. Giacomotti 1974, 88-90, no. 342.


18. Rackham 1940, 1: nos. 258, 260; 2, pi. 41.


19. Giacomotti 1962, 25, fig. 3.


20. Wilson 1987A, 115, 117, fig. XV.


21. Faietti and Oberhuber 1988, 311-14, no. 93.


22. Wilson 1987A, 115-17, no. 184,- the slightly more static grouping of
    figures, more exaggerated musculature, and more adept and precise ren­
    dering of the background with buildings in perspective than in other
    works here attributed to the Master C. I. may be explained by the fact
    that, on this plate, the artist is copying a painter's drawing rather than
    inventing the composition himself.


23. Giacomotti 1974, 90-91, no. 343; this plate was attributed to the
    Master C. I. by Prentice von Erdberg 1950, 283-87.


24. Rackham 1940, 1: 84-90; 2: nos. 266-78, pis. 42-45.


25. For a further discussion of this issue and for other related examples see
    Wilson 1996, 104-6, no. 48.


26. See, for example, Mallet 1996, figs. 1-4.

Dish with Amata and Turnus 139